As Ryan mentioned, there are a few documents already started by the community about Acessibility Guidelines. With the help of the Design team and others, I will consolidate these best practices into a document and then the rest of the community can have a dialogue around it. We can then work on improving the document together.
On Friday, February 21, 2014, Isarra Yos <[email protected]> wrote: > This may seem like a bit of a weird question, but how can we get a to a > meaninful consensus with this? As is we seem to have quite a few folks on > different sides of things with different ideas of what's proper, and > usually good reasons behind these conflicting ideas. How can we address > that in a way that would work best for the platform that is important to > all of us? > > -I > > On 20/02/14 21:28, Trevor Parscal wrote: > > Ryan, +1 > > I'm pretty sure that what Ryan is asking for here is not a rehash or > critique of guidelines, but a plan to collect the good parts of existing > one and supplement them where needed to create a single coherent > non-conflicting set of guidelines we can all point to, discuss, evolve and > seek to conform to. > > Perhaps more direct questions will get more direct answers. > > - Who is going to lead this work? > - Who is going to commit to actively participate? > - Where will this work be done? > - When will this work be done? > > > - Trevor > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Quiddity <[email protected]>wrote: > > Regarding vision, I found 2 great "impairment simulators", and have added > them to the Accessibility_guide_for_developers page.[1][2] > > One other thing to emphasize, beyond typography: > * Tiny clickable-targets are discouraged * > For some users, they are both > * hard to see, > * and hard to position a mouse-pointer over (think carpal > tunnel/arthritis, or just someone using those laptop "nub pointers"[3]) > This most recently came up in regards to the tiny [x] close-icon on a > centralnoticebanner. (it was fixed) > > HTH. > Quiddity > > > [1] > http://www.inclusivedesigntoolkit.com/betterdesign2/simsoftware/simsoftware.html > [2] > http://www.cnib.ca/en/your-eyes/eye-conditions/eye-connect/Pages/EyeSimulator.aspx > [3] https://xkcd.com/243/ > > > > On 14-02-20 11:05 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: > > In the old days (2011), the WMF had design guidelines that discussed > accessibility issues such as appropriate font sizes, use of colors, and > text contrast. These guidelines were later replaced with the Agora > guidelines (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Design) > which specify only that "We must enable access for users with impairments." > > Accessibility is central to our mission as an organization and very > important to our community. In fact the en.wiki community has enacted > their own comprehensive accessibility guidelines for content: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Accessibility > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Accessibility_dos_and_don'ts > > Mediawiki developers also have a set of published accessibility guidelines: > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Accessibility_guide_for_developers > > The issue of accessibility in MediaWiki UX design has been raised > numerous times in the recent past, most commonly in regard to font sizes > and colors. I'm personally aware of it coming up at least 5 times in the > past year (Typog > >
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
